Page 108 of 606
T 006
Page 108 of 606
130
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
and understand everyone's arguments. The views of many Members can be said to be very uniform in terms of the direction. As far as this is concerned, I wish to put forth some supplementary views and recommendations.
In fact, everyone has touched on the Consultation Document on Review of District Organizations released by the Government and, as far as the motive is concerned, doubt has been cast on the credibility of the Government. Members' views also give a big question mark to the management culture and calibre of the Government.
The Government has carried out a review of the administrative structure, which contains a review of the constitutional system. The Government dares not base its review on full facts. It has provided only partial information. The Government dares not identify the purpose and objective of the review with those of the political and constitutional systems. Hence, everyone has time and again accused the review of being one rescinding and recalling the rights of the representative bodies and symbolizing retrogression in democratization. Through the review paper, it can be seen that the Government's motive is dubious and it has lost its credibility.
I believe that, having witnessed the Government's calibre and culture in the management of various major issues and the existing management mechanism, everyone has great reservation about allowing the Government to resume entirely the management of such major livelihood-related issues as food safety and environmental hygiene without public involvement in the policy-making and supervision processes.
I have listened to and agree with Dr. Ho Chi-ping's analogy that four different operations are undertaken without the result of each operation being assured. It is like the Consultation Document, which has a body but not a soul. A lot of information is lacking. Nevertheless, I still hope that the review will be completed as soon as possible and that it is a comprehensive one.
I have therefore all along advocated since early June that the Government should consider deferring the review of the constitutional system, including the elections of the two municipal councils and even the district boards for a few months until 2000. The recommendation has two merits:
1. There will be two years between now and 2000 during which comprehensive administrative arrangements and discussions as well as a review of the political system can be made;
2. To fix the year of election in 2000 will synchronize and simplify the various elections.
Under the existing system, there will be the elections of the district boards and municipal councils next year, the election of the Legislative Council in 2000, the election of the CE in 2002, the elections of the district boards and municipal councils in 2003, the election of the Legco in 2004 and the election of the CE in 2007 and so forth. In other words, there is an election almost every year.
Page 108 of 606.
Page 108 of 606
T 006
Page 108 of 606
130
PROVISIONAL URBAN COUNCIL
and understand everyone's arguments. The views of many Members can be said to be very uniform in terms of the direction. As far as this is concerned, 1 wish to put forth some supplementary views and recommendations.
In fact everyone has touched on the Consultation Document on Review of District Organizations released by the Government and as far as the motive is concerned, doubt has been cast on the credibility of the Government. Members' views also give a big question mark to the management culture and calibre of the Government.
The Government has carried out a review of the administrative structure, which contains a review of the constitutional system. The Government dares not base its review on full facts. It has provided only partial information. The Government dares not identify the purpose and objective of the review with those of the political and constitutional systems. Hence everyone has time and again accused the review of being one rescinding and recalling the rights of the representative bodies and symbolizing retrogression in democratization. Through the review paper, it can be seen that the Government's motive is dubious and it has lost its credibility.
I believe that having witnessed the Government's calibre and culture in the management of various major issues and the existing management mechanism, everyone has great reservation about allowing the Government to resume entirely the management of such major livelihood-related issues as food safety and environmental hygiene without public involvement in the policy-making and supervision processes.
I have listened to and agree with Dr. Ho Chi-ping's analogy that four different operations are undertaken without the result of each operation being assured. It is like the Consultation Document, which has a body but not a soul. A lot of information is lacking. Nevertheless, I still hope that the review will be completed as soon as possible and that it is a comprehensive one.
I have therefore all along advocated since early June that the Government should consider deferring the review of the constitutional system, including the elections of the two municipal councils and even the district boards for a few months until 2000. The recommendation has two merits:
1.
There will be two years between now and 2000 during which comprehensive administrative arrangements and discussions as well as a review of the political system can be made;
2. To fix the year of election in 2000 will synchronize and simplify the
various elections.
Under the existing system, there will be the elections of the district boards and municipal councils next year, the election of the Legislative Council in 2000, the election of the CE in 2002, the elections of the district boards and municipal councils in 2003, the election of the Legco in 2004 and the election of the CE 2007 and so fourth. In other words, there is an election almost every
Page 108 of 606.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.